Author
Topic: Waiting for a Sigma 50 "A" like their 35 to appear? (Read 24260 times)

The last time I was at Focus on Imaging in Birmingham, I visited the Sigma stall. They had a new 70-200 2.8 there for playing with. It was very nice but the one on the stand had some pretty awful front focus (not a little) and the big 300-800 f5.6 was a lot of fun....but it was soft wide open over 500mm. Pretty sharp under that focal length....but what's the point in having an 800mm f5.6 if you can't use it wide open? My 400mm f2.8 L IS is sharper with a 2x TC and costs less. I had a go on their 500mmm f4.5, which was nice but again didn't compare to the Canon version. At that point I figured I was done there. I still own and use a Siggi 12-24mm mkI, which is still a pretty unique lens in the market place. Quality control was awful with this particular lens, but a good one is a good find. I think it's amusing that Sigma have bought out this dock thang....getting us to pay for a device to correct their awful QC and on our time too....come on Sigma. I suspect that Sigma's QC is going to drop even further now...and they will blame their userbase for not stumping up the cash for the USB dock.

for new 70-200 do you mean the lens that won as the best expert lens at tipa awards 2011 or something newer? had the same lens and i had to adjust focus with a +3....so? i had to adjust a canon 70-200 f/4 with a +7...the canon was ff "badly"...lol!and could you tell me why canon services provides by payment the adjustement of focus for lenses? i do not believe they fix sigma lenses.

and now the brutal fact...sigma 35 mm destroys canon offering costing significantly less...40% or so

The last time I was at Focus on Imaging in Birmingham, I visited the Sigma stall. They had a new 70-200 2.8 there for playing with. It was very nice but the one on the stand had some pretty awful front focus (not a little) and the big 300-800 f5.6 was a lot of fun....but it was soft wide open over 500mm. Pretty sharp under that focal length....but what's the point in having an 800mm f5.6 if you can't use it wide open? My 400mm f2.8 L IS is sharper with a 2x TC and costs less. I had a go on their 500mmm f4.5, which was nice but again didn't compare to the Canon version. At that point I figured I was done there. I still own and use a Siggi 12-24mm mkI, which is still a pretty unique lens in the market place. Quality control was awful with this particular lens, but a good one is a good find. I think it's amusing that Sigma have bought out this dock thang....getting us to pay for a device to correct their awful QC and on our time too....come on Sigma. I suspect that Sigma's QC is going to drop even further now...and they will blame their userbase for not stumping up the cash for the USB dock.

for new 70-200 do you mean the lens that won as the best expert lens at tipa awards 2011 or something newer? had the same lens and i had to adjust focus with a +3....so? i had to adjust a canon 70-200 f/4 with a +7...the canon was ff "badly"...lol!and could you tell me why canon services provides by payment the adjustment of focus for lenses? i do not believe they fix sigma lenses.

and now the brutal fact...sigma 35 mm destroys canon offering costing significantly less...40% or so

I didn't say when I went to Focus on Imaging, it was just around the time for their Macro HSM mk 1 I think. Again it was so far out of adjustment, I called over the attendant and he confirmed it. And then put the lens under the counter with a post it note on it. It was worse than my old copy. It's been surprising how many 70-200mm f2.8 lenses Sigma has put out over the years. I'm assuming this is to correct various design faults with each successive model. Other brands like Nikon or Canon tend to get it right first time and let that model run for a good 10 years or so. That said, I took some great pictures with my old copy.

My 70-200 EX HSM f2.8 (new at the time) was so far out of calibration...it had to go to Sigma twice with the Camera. It was bad. I'm not going to re-tell my Sigma woes here again, I did that a few pages back. Hello if you are new to this thread

I've sent only one lenses back to Canon for being out of Calibration, which I did under their 1 year warranty. It didn't cost a thing and came back perfect.

Yep, it true about the new Siggi 35mm, it's a fine lens from Siggi. I don't think it destroys the Canon, but it's a sharper lens. I've had my Canon copy for about 5 years now and I've taken a lot of photos with mine. It's easily paid for itself many times over. The Siggi fisheye's are very good too and I particularly have a soft spot for their 12-24mm, although my copy had been back to Sigma twice.

I wish the problem was simple front or back focus. The problem with some Sigma lenses is that focus goes back and forth between front, spot on, and back. Or maybe I shouldn't generalize - that's the problem with MY Sigma 50, and I've read many other similar accounts with other lenses including the new 35 1.4. You can't account for it, just need to either hope it hits or use MF (which stinks, because there is little throw in the focus ring and it's not very smooth). To me that speaks to some sort of poor alignment of a physical piece of the lens, not just computer error, which is in turn related to QC.

I REALLY want the 35 1.4, but I'm too put off by recent experience to bother. Maybe I'll get over it some day and break down, or maybe that USB thingie will work.

I wish the problem was simple front or back focus. The problem with some Sigma lenses is that focus goes back and forth between front, spot on, and back. Or maybe I shouldn't generalize - that's the problem with MY Sigma 50, and I've read many other similar accounts with other lenses including the new 35 1.4. You can't account for it, just need to either hope it hits or use MF (which stinks, because there is little throw in the focus ring and it's not very smooth). To me that speaks to some sort of poor alignment of a physical piece of the lens, not just computer error, which is in turn related to QC.

I REALLY want the 35 1.4, but I'm too put off by recent experience to bother. Maybe I'll get over it some day and break down, or maybe that USB thingie will work.

Rather than buy the Sigma 35, it just sounds to me like you should sell your Sigma 50mm f/1.4. I've not read any good reviews for that lens. Sigma's own MTF charts show sharpness drops off massively towards the borders and corners, even on a crop body. And that's if you achieve "perfect focus"...It just seems to me that they designed it as a compromise lens. You would be better off selling it, and just buying a used or new Canon 1.4 or 1.2, if you need more autofocus accuracy. Or else just use a 24-70 f/2.8 (either the Tamron, or the old or new Canons...obviously that's getting into higher cost territory).

Achieving consistent and accurate autofocus with an f/1.4 or faster lens, can definitely sometimes be asking for trouble, even if it's a Canon lens. I've personally never achieved that, nor can I reliably get sharp focus manually, through the viewfinder, enough of the time to do it in a professional setting.

From a marketing standpoint, even Sigma critics would admit that they needed to "rebrand" their line...calling it "art", "sport", etc. In an attempt to set the new designs apart from the older ones. However, it seems to me that the "sport" 120-300 f/2.8, just may be the same old optical formula...so that kind of pollutes the pool water for the "new line". The "look" of the lens bodies for the new line though, is simply stunning.

The Sigma 35mm f/1.4 may wind up standing alone as the only "Canon killer" lens they make. I hope it's not, but you never know, until the (unbiased) tests are in.

My Sigma 50mm 1.4 sat on the shelf a lot when my primary camera was a 5D classic. The focus was just too erratic to make use of it at wide apertures. My 7D was a bit better, but still not great.

When I got my 5D Mark 3 about 7 months ago, the Sigma suddenly started focusing very well! I now use it a lot hand held as a full body portrait lens at about F/2.0 in soft available light where I focus on the eyes and let the body be blurred. That's what I bought it for in the first place. I have to admit that I'm not getting tack sharp images this way, but it works fine for the boudoir business and saves me a lot of retouching. LOL

Anyway, the point I'd like to make is that some of the erratic focus may be due to the camera body you are using.

I would have exchanged it for another one before I decided to "stick with canon"...and I also would have shot the video in the horizontal aspect. Looks too much like the stupid videos all the 14 year olds shoot, if you do it vertically...just my two cents.

Isn't it also a factor for you, hanifshootsphotos, that you might be a little peeved that your Canon 35mm f/1.4, is worth a bit less on the used market than it was, before the Sigma came out?

I would have exchanged it for another one before I decided to "stick with canon"...and I also would have shot the video in the horizontal aspect. Looks too much like the stupid videos all the 14 year olds shoot, if you do it vertically...just my two cents.

Isn't it also a factor for you, hanifshootsphotos, that you might be a little peeved that your Canon 35mm f/1.4, is worth a bit less on the used market than it was, before the Sigma came out?

For starters thanks for the l laugh, I seriously needed it that video was brutal why didnt I just use my 60d to illustrate the point?!? You're right the used market is flooded with 35mm 1.4 hoovering around 1K and a little below. After I cool down I may try another Sigma 35mm or get something completely different.

I didn't say when I went to Focus on Imaging, it was just around the time for their Macro HSM mk 1 I think. Again it was so far out of adjustment, I called over the attendant and he confirmed it. And then put the lens under the counter with a post it note on it. It was worse than my old copy. It's been surprising how many 70-200mm f2.8 lenses Sigma has put out over the years. I'm assuming this is to correct various design faults with each successive model. Other brands like Nikon or Canon tend to get it right first time and let that model run for a good 10 years or so. That said, I took some great pictures with my old copy.

My 70-200 EX HSM f2.8 (new at the time) was so far out of calibration...it had to go to Sigma twice with the Camera. It was bad. I'm not going to re-tell my Sigma woes here again, I did that a few pages back. Hello if you are new to this thread

I've sent only one lenses back to Canon for being out of Calibration, which I did under their 1 year warranty. It didn't cost a thing and came back perfect.

Yep, it true about the new Siggi 35mm, it's a fine lens from Siggi. I don't think it destroys the Canon, but it's a sharper lens. I've had my Canon copy for about 5 years now and I've taken a lot of photos with mine. It's easily paid for itself many times over. The Siggi fisheye's are very good too and I particularly have a soft spot for their 12-24mm, although my copy had been back to Sigma twice.

i had the HSM mk II and it was front focusing a lot on 50D (i ended with a +16 mfa) and almost perfect on 450D...so the fault is Sigma or Canon? And i have at lest one more person that got the same results... weird; then some months after i got the OS version of the lens , beacuse of a good offer from amazon in eu, and the focus was quite good on both cameras (just a +3 to achieve the maximum sharpness). And dont think sigma did a lot of 70-200 because as far i remember there are four lenses so far

know peoples that had to exchange the Canon 35L 1.4 twice before they got a good sample and for what i know, canon doesnt offer free calibration for their lenses, at least here in italy, but maybe i am wrong, because i own just a canon lens (a S___ty 17-85... +5 for the record); i am not sure it's completly a sigma QC fault the AF problems, because with nikon the problems are not so pronunced as with canon. i think the accuracy of focues with canon camera is more firmware dependant than other brands, but with the new dock, i guess a lot of problems will go away

i had the HSM mk II and it was front focusing a lot on 50D (i ended with a +16 mfa) and almost perfect on 450D...so the fault is Sigma or Canon? And i have at lest one more person that got the same results... weird; then some months after i got the OS version of the lens , beacuse of a good offer from amazon in eu, and the focus was quite good on both cameras (just a +3 to achieve the maximum sharpness). And dont think sigma did a lot of 70-200 because as far i remember there are four lenses so far

know peoples that had to exchange the Canon 35L 1.4 twice before they got a good sample and for what i know, canon doesnt offer free calibration for their lenses, at least here in italy, but maybe i am wrong, because i own just a canon lens (a S___ty 17-85... +5 for the record); i am not sure it's completly a sigma QC fault the AF problems, because with nikon the problems are not so pronunced as with canon. i think the accuracy of focues with canon camera is more firmware dependant than other brands, but with the new dock, i guess a lot of problems will go away

A +5/-5 micro adjust is quite minor and easily within a lens / lens mount manufacturing tollerences. But a +15/-15 is pretty obviously a lens issue. Especially if it's the same across multiple cameras. I'm currently running a pair of 5DIII's and a 5DII and I had to micro adjust every lens on every camera. None of my lenses were more than +5/-5 adjustment across all three cams. One of cams consistently needs more - adjustment than my other two.

Sigma seem to pop out a new 70-200 fairly regularly:70-200 f2.8 APO70-200 f2.8 EX HSM70-200 f2.8 EX DG HSM (new shell and coatings)70-200 f2.8 EX DG MACRO 70-200 f2.8 EX DG MACRO II70-200 f2.8 OSI dare say the new OS version is about to be re-designed in their new Sport livery and new outer casing.

It's tricky to compare with Canon, because their IS and non IS versions are not replacements but are options.ef 70-200 f2.8 L, there has only been one.ef 70-200 f2.8 L IS was a very old lens, the very first 70-200 with IS and predates digital SLR's. This lens was only recently upadated with the 70-200 f2.8 L IS II. So if you compare Canon non IS, there's only been one lens and if you compare IS lenses...there has only been two.

I'm not saying that Canon don't have QC issues, but in my experiance they are a lot less common and far less sevear than Sigma's QC issues. My Sigma issues were very bad and quite frequent.

Here in the UK, if a Canon lens is out of spec it can be sent in for calibration under warrenty. I belive this is a Europe wide policy. but they will charge if the lens is within expected tollerences. I've only had one lens which has needed this...unfortunatly a lot of people don't think to send it in under the manufacturers warrenty.

Talking about the Sig 35mm, I just had a mishap the other day and dropped the baby 4ft onto concrete Never dropped a lens or camera before and it had to be my best lens right before a wedding shoot!!But alas, the build quality! It hit the mount and bent it a little, and there's a big scuff on the side near the mount, which caused it to be real tough to get it back onto my 5DII, but with force it clicked in.And it works! No broken glass, aperture and AF work perfectly, and dead on with no need for AFMA.No weird flares and signs of anything wrong, I'm impressed with Sigma~Per chance there could be misalignment or some sort of failure-waiting-to-happen, but as long as it could get through the next even then I'm sending it in for warranty right away, hopefully they fix any problems.

So yes, a new A 50mm would be sweet, although I got a 35mm because 50mm I find is too boring, but I'll be paying close attention to their new releases~

Glad to hear your 35 survived such a bad fall. It's nice to know it's built as well as it appears to be. I'm also waiting for the next FF release in the Art line. I'm hoping for an 85 or the rumored 135 f/1.8 OS. I'm dying to pick up the USB dock, but there's nothing about my 35 that I want to change. Perhaps the next lens will give me an excuse...

Someone at Sigma deserves a big raise or something, for effecting such a radical turnaround in both their image and in their product line. The decision to make the one super high quality 35mm prime got everyone's attention and has people anticipating the follow-up lenses. Then the idea to release the lens "dock" directly addressed and solved their big problems of 1.) perceived inconsistent focus and 2.) future incompatibility with new body firmware.

Even the guy who decided to kill the god-awful crinkle finish deserves a nice bonus.

To go from a reputation that to almost everyone (rightly or wrongly) said "unexciting and mediocre", almost overnight to being spoken of as a serious rival to top end manufacturers' OEM glass is impressive. Even if you never buy a Sigma lens, you may benefit from the healthy "spurring" effect of stiff competition on Canon's lens quality, innovation, upgrade frequency, and pricing.